Education MED Program Assessment Report for AY

Education MED Program Assessment Report for AY 2016-17 April 15, 2018

Program Assessment Overview This 2018 annual report presents the required evidence from the last three academic years that Masters of Education in Education (EDUC MED) candidates preparing to work in schools as teachers know and demonstrate the content knowledge, pedagogical content knowledge and skills, pedagogical and professional knowledge and skills, and the professional dispositions necessary to help all students learn. It should be noted that the program s name was changed in 2017 from Secondary Education MED to Education MED at the request of the Arkansas Department of Education, because several licensure areas are for K-12 th grade instead of just 7-12 th grade. For simplicity, we just refer to the new program name across the 2014-15, 2015-16, and 2017-18 Academic Years (AY) throughout this report. The EDUC MED program leads to the MED as well as licensure in several content areas. Due to low numbers of completers in several of these areas, we collapse and aggregate the data across licensure areas because this report will be made public. The data presented below is reported for completers of the program by academic year. The table below shows the number of completers who also received licensure by licensure area by academic year. Please note that some completers may have received licensure in multiple areas. Finally, the numbers of completers data across the assessments vary because we may not have data for each assessment for each academic year for all completers. Licensure Area 2014-15 AY 2015-16 AY 2016-17 AY Art 4 1 1 Business Ed 5 1 0 Drama/Speech 1 1 2 English 5 2 3 Foreign Language 1 1 0 Math 1 1 1 Music 1 0 2 Physical Ed/Health 2 0 0 Science 3 8 5 Social Studies 3 1 0 TOTAL 26 16 15 Program Overview: Mission, Goals & Objectives The EDUC MED program prepares teachers for initial licensure in grades K-12 or 7-12 in the following content areas: art (K-12), biology, chemistry, earth science, English, foreign language(k-12), history, mathematics, physical education and health sciences (K-12), physics, 2

social studies, speech and speech/drama. Graduates are required to maintain professional connections with schools, and as graduates, they continue to work collaboratively with school colleagues, parents/guardians, and the community; in addition, they acquire the foundations and dispositions in research, problem-solving, reflective thinking and technology for lifelong learning. The EDUC MED program provides proficiency in professional education, curriculum and instruction, teaching skills, and a teaching specialty. Two tracks are offered within the master s degree program: the initial licensure track, and the provisional initial licensure track. Assessment data from these two levels are combined in the following report. The EDUC MED program bases this assessment report on the 2016 CAEP Initial Preparation Standards which are mandatory for all initial programs seeking CAEP accreditation. This assessment report focuses on CAEP Standard 1: Standard 1: Content and Pedagogical Knowledge - The provider ensures that candidates develop a deep understanding of the critical concepts and principles of their discipline and, by completion, are able to use discipline-specific practices flexibly to advance the learning of all students toward attainment of college- and career readiness standards. Candidate Knowledge, Skills, and Professional Dispositions 1.1 Candidates demonstrate an understanding of the 10 InTASC standards at the appropriate progression level(s) in the following categories: the learner and learning; content; instructional practice; and professional responsibility. Provider Responsibilities: 1.2 Providers ensure that candidates use research and evidence to develop an understanding of the teaching profession and use both to measure their P-12 students progress and their own professional practice. 1.3 Providers ensure that candidates apply content and pedagogical knowledge as reflected in outcome assessments in response to standards of Specialized Professional Associations (SPA), the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS), states, or other accrediting bodies (e.g., National Association of Schools of Music NASM). 1.4 Providers ensure that candidates demonstrate skills and commitment that afford all P-12 students access to rigorous college- and career-ready standards (e.g., Next Generation Science Standards, National Career Readiness Certificate, Common Core State Standards). 1.5 Providers ensure that candidates model and apply technology standards as they design, implement and assess learning experiences to engage students and improve learning; and enrich professional practice. (CAEP Accreditation Handbook, March 2016, p. 14) The required candidate knowledge and skills embedded in Standard 1 are those of the Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC), the Council of Chief State School Officers' project that defined teacher standards (https://www.ccsso.org/resource-library/intasc- 3

model-core-teaching-standards-and-learning-progressions-teachers-10 ). The InTASC standards are also aligned with the Arkansas Department of Model Core Teaching Standards: Standard #1: Learner Development. The teacher understands how learners grow and develop, recognizing that patterns of learning and development vary individually within and across the cognitive, linguistic, social, emotional, and physical areas, and designs and implements developmentally appropriate and challenging learning experiences. Standard #2: Learning Differences. The teacher uses understanding of individual differences and diverse cultures and communities to ensure inclusive learning environments that enable each learner to meet high standards. Standard #3: Learning Environments. The teacher works with others to create environments that support individual and collaborative learning, and that encourage positive social interaction, active engagement in learning, and self-motivation. Standard #4: Content Knowledge. The teacher understands the central concepts, tools of inquiry, and structures of the discipline(s) he or she teaches and creates learning experiences that make the discipline accessible and meaningful for learners to assure mastery of the content. Standard #5: Application of Content. The teacher understands how to connect concepts and use differing perspectives to engage learners in critical thinking, creativity, and collaborative problem solving related to authentic local and global issues. Standard #6: Assessment. The teacher understands and uses multiple methods of assessment to engage learners in their own growth, to monitor learner progress, and to guide the teacher s and learner s decision making. Standard #7: Planning for Instruction. The teacher plans instruction that supports every student in meeting rigorous learning goals by drawing upon knowledge of content areas, curriculum, cross-disciplinary skills, and pedagogy, as well as knowledge of learners and the community context. Standard #8: Instructional Strategies. The teacher understands and uses a variety of instructional strategies to encourage learners to develop deep understanding of content areas and their connections, and to build skills to apply knowledge in meaningful ways. Standard #9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice. The teacher engages in ongoing professional learning and uses evidence to continually evaluate his/her practice, particularly the effects of his/her choices and actions on others (learners, families, other professionals, and the community), and adapts practice to meet the needs of each learner. Standard #10: Leadership and Collaboration. The teacher seeks appropriate leadership roles and opportunities to take responsibility for student learning, to collaborate with learners, families, colleagues, other school professionals, and community members to ensure learner growth, and to advance the profession. Data Overview 4

In this report, we present the EDUC MED data as evidence that our EDUC MED initial licensure candidates develop the content and pedagogical knowledge, skills, and dispositions deemed necessary for advancing the learning of all students toward attainment of college and career readiness standards. The mechanism for developing the aggregated data for Unit evaluation of the content and pedagogical knowledge and skills of our initial licensure candidates is referred to as ilab (see Table S1_1.1_INTASC_Crosswalk below for the specific assessments and their alignment with the INTASC standards). These data can be aggregated by program and the entire unit or disaggregated by licensure area within programs. The numerous licensure areas that comprise the EDUC MED use disaggregated data for the various Specialty Professional Association reports for national recognition. However, in this annual report, we have aggregated all specific licensure area data and present the data, analyses, and interpretations for the EDUC MED program as a unit. The assessment system used by the EDUC MED program is part of a broader EPP assessment system for all initial licensure programs that was developed across several years starting in 2006 through the previous NCATE accreditation and subsequently through the various restructuring efforts across the last 3 years. The ilab assessments were developed by faculty to provide a better means for aggregating and comparing candidate performance across our various initial licensure programs. It provides a flexible assessment system that allows for individual program variation in assessments due to various professional goals and standards and specific SPA requirements, while also providing a means for EPP or unit assessment on common rubrics across programs. Each licensure program has its own unique assessment system tied to respective SPA key assessments, but every program is required to include these key assessments of candidate knowledge, skills, and dispositions at common gateways across the programs. Candidates then submit the required performances (assignments, etc.) into their electronic portfolios in Chalk & Wire at both the Program level and the appropriate Unit level (ilab for initial licensure programs). Faculty score these assessments using both their unique program rubrics approved by their respective SPAs for candidate and program assessment and a common EPP/unit scoring rubric for aggregated EPP/unit assessment. The scoring rubrics for ilab were developed by EPP faculty and allow aggregation and comparison across programs using a common scoring standard. Table S1_1.1_INTASC_Crosswalk: TCED ilab Assessments Aligned to INTASC Standards ILab Assessment Graduate Initial Programs Course Prerequisites* The Learner and Learning INTASC Standards Content Knowledge Instructional Practice Professional Responsibility 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Lesson Plan Case Study TESS Field Observation* Dispositions 5

Technology Unit Plan Teacher Work Sample Teaching Philosophy TESS - Internship Exit Survey * These assessments are not included and data is not provided in this Standard 1 report because data is not gathered in common across all initial licensure programs for these assessments. CAEP Standard 1.1: Data presented in the following sections of the standard provides evidence that our initial licensure candidates develop the professional knowledge, skills, and dispositions defined by the INTASC Standards. Specifically, evidence, disaggregated by specialty area, is obtained from the following assessments and measures that comprise our EPP/unit assessments, ilab and ADE required Praxis content and pedagogy exams. Table S1_1.1 (above) provides a crosswalk of how the various ilab Assessments are aligned with the specific INTASC Standards. Taken together, the data from the ilab assessments and the state required Praxis content and pedagogy tests provide evidence that our initial licensure candidates demonstrate an understanding of and have acquired the knowledge, skills, and dispositions of the 10 INTASC standards. Data from the ilab assessments and Praxis Exams attached in this standard provide evidence that our completing candidates demonstrate an understanding of the 10 INTASC standards at the appropriate progression levels in the following categories: 1. The Learner and Learning: Lesson Plan, Case Study, Dispositions, Unit Plan, Teaching Philosophy and the TESS-Internship Observation. 2. Content Knowledge: Lesson Plan, Unit Plan, Tess-Internship Observation, and the Praxis Content Exams (not inluded due to privacy issues) 3. Instructional Practice: Lesson Plan, Technology, Unit Plan, Teacher Work Sample, TESS-Internship Observation, and the Praxis Pedagogy Exams (not included) 4. Professional Responsibility: Dispositions, Teaching Philosophy, and the TESS-Internship Observation. Analyses of the data/evidence are provided for completers of our initial licensure programs in the 2014-15; 2015-16; and 2016-17 academic years in each of the assessment attachments: S1_1.1_INTASC_Crosswalk: TCED ilab Assessments Aligned to INTASC Standards S1_1.2_Praxis_Content_Exams and_praxis_pedagogy_exams (not inluded due to privacy issues) S1_1.3_Lesson_Plan S1_1.4_Case_Study S1_1.5 Unit Plan S1_1.6_Dispositions 6

S1_1.7_Technology S1_1.8_Teacher_Work_Sample S1_1.9_Teaching_Philosophy S1_1.10_TESS_Internship_Observation Standard 1.2: Data presented in the following attachments provides evidence that our initial licensure candidates use research and evidence to help further develop their teaching knowledge and skills and to assess student progress and the effectiveness of their own teaching. Specifically, evidence, disaggregated by specialty area, is obtained from the following assessments and measures: S1_1.4_Case_Study S1_1.8_Teacher_Work_Sample S1_1.10_TESS_Internship_Observation Analyses of the data/evidence are provided for completers of our initial licensure programs in the 2014-15, 2015-16, and 2016-17 academic years in each of the assessment attachments. Data presented in the attached assessments appear to document that our candidates effectively and successfully use research and evidence for planning, implementing, and evaluating their K-12 students progress in their field and clinical placements. Further, it appears that they reflect on their effectiveness and practice and they appear to be able to use data on their students performance to assess their progress and to modify instruction and management based on that data. Specifically, review of the Case Study data for initial candidates suggests a majority of our completers of these programs demonstrate a proficient skill in identifying a central issue and developing an action plan for successfully dealing with the issue using specific evidence throughout this process to support evaluations and suggested actions and plans. Further, the candidates do so by demonstrate an understanding of the roles of learner development and differences and the need to collaborate with others in successfully implementing the action plan. Review of the Teacher Work Sample data suggests a majority of our completers of the initial programs demonstrate an emerging to comprehensive understanding of the use of multiple methods of assessment to engage learners in their own growth, to monitor learner progress, and to guide the teacher's and learner's decision making. Additionally, candidates show emerging to comprehensive ability to plan instruction that supports every student in meeting rigorous learning goals by drawing upon knowledge of content areas, curriculum, cross-disciplinary skills, and pedagogy, as well as knowledge of learners and the community context. Finally, they demonstrate an emerging to comprehensive understanding and use of a variety of instructional strategies to encourage learners to develop deep understanding of content areas and their connections, and to build skills to apply knowledge in meaningful ways. Review of the pertinent components or subdomains of the TESS Observation Scoring Rubric suggests that a majority of our completers of the initial programs were observed as being proficient to distinguished across the following components related to Standard 1.2: Component 1b: Demonstrating Knowledge of Students; Component 1c: Setting Instructional Outcomes; Component 1e: Designing Coherent Instruction; Component 1f: Designing Student Assessments; 7

Component 3d: Using Assessment in Instruction; Component 3e: Demonstrating Flexibility and Responsiveness; Component 4a: Reflecting on Teaching; Component 4b: Maintaining Accurate Records; and Component 4e: Growing and Developing Professionally. Standard 1.3: Data presented within various Specialized Professional Association (SPA) reports, shows that we ensure our candidates apply content and pedagogical knowledge that meet professional standards. Table S1_3.1_EDUC_MED_Program_Recognition_Status shows that our initial licensure programs that comprise the EDUC MED are either nationally recognized by the Specialty Professional Organizations, endorsed with a similar State review by the Arkansas Department of Education (which uses the NCATE SPA template for its review), or nationally recognized through other professional accrediting bodies (such as NSAD, AACSB, and NASM). Table S1_3.1_EDUC_MED_Program_Recognition_Status Initial Licensure Programs: Degree Earned College Specialized Professional Association Program Status (Spring 2018) Secondary Education Graduate Initial Licensure (MEd) by Content Area: Art MED CEHP NSAD*** Nationally Recognized Business Ed MED CEHP AACSB*** Nationally Recognized Drama/Speech MED CEHP ADE ** State Recognized English MED CEHP NCTE* Nationally Recognized Foreign Languages MED CEHP ACTFL* Nationally Recognized Health Science and P.E. MED CEHP ADE (SSPEWL)** State Recognized Math MED CEHP NCTM* Nationally Recognized Science MED CEHP NSTA* Nationally Recognized Social Studies MED CEHP NCSS* Nationally Recognized Music MED CEHP NASM*** Nationally Recognized * NCATE adopted Specialized Professional Association standards ** Arkansas State Department of Education (ADE) Endorsement (specific SPA/State standards that were followed) *** non-ncate Specialized Professional Associations/Organizations Standard 1.4: Data presented below suggests that we ensure that our candidates demonstrate skills and commitment to meet rigorous college- and career-ready standards. Specifically, evidence, disaggregated by specialty area, is obtained from the following assessments and measures: ILab: Lesson & Unit Plans; Teacher Work Samples; Case Studies, and TESS field and internship observations, including dispositions. S1_1.3_Lesson_Plan S1_1.4_Case_Study S1_1.5 Unit Plan S1_1.6_Dispositions S1_1.8_Teacher_Work_Sample S1_1.9_Teaching_Philosophy S1_1.10_TESS_Internship_Observation 8

Analyses of the data/evidence are provided for completers of our initial licensure programs in the 2014-15, 2015-16, and 2016-7 academic years in each the above assessment attachments. Taken together, the data provides evidence of our candidates ability to provide and differentiate instruction for all students. They plan and teach lessons and units that requires students to apply knowledge in solving problems and thinking critically. Their lessons demonstrate candidates ability to include cross-discipline learning experiences and to teach for transfer of skills and to design and implement learning experiences that require collaboration and communication skills. Specifically, review of the lesson plan data suggests that a majority of our completers of the initial programs demonstrate a comprehensive understanding of the use of relevant aspects of student backgrounds in planning instruction; and, candidates clearly articulate instructional goals based on this analysis. Additionally, candidates show mastery in use and selection of appropriate instructional resources and in using evaluation to plan future instruction. Review of Unit Plan data suggests that a majority of our completers of the initial programs demonstrate an emerging to comprehensive understanding of the use of relevant aspects of student backgrounds, student diversity, contextual variables and content knowledge in planning instruction across a unit; and, candidates clearly articulate instructional goals based on this analysis. Additionally, graduate initial licensure candidates show mastery in use and selection of a variety of appropriate instructional resources and in using a variety of assessments to evaluation student learning. The graduate initial candidates also demonstrate emerging to comprehensive understandings of how to connect concepts and use differing perspectives to engage learners in critical thinking, creativity, and collaborative problem solving related to authentic local and global issues. Review of the Case Study data for initial candidates suggests a majority of our completers of these programs demonstrate a proficient skill in identifying a central issue and developing an action plan for successfully dealing with the issue using specific evidence throughout this process to support evaluations and suggested actions and plans. Further, the candidates do so by demonstrating an understanding of the roles of learner development and differences and the need to collaborate with others in successfully implementing the action plan. Review of the Teacher Work Sample data suggests a majority of our completers of the initial programs demonstrate an emerging to comprehensive understanding of the use of multiple methods of assessment to engage learners in their own growth, to monitor learner progress, and to guide the teacher's and learner's decision making. Additionally, candidates show emerging to comprehensive ability to plan instruction that supports every student in meeting rigorous learning goals by drawing upon knowledge of content areas, curriculum, cross-disciplinary skills, and pedagogy, as well as knowledge of learners and the community context. Finally, they demonstrate an emerging to comprehensive understanding and use of a variety of instructional strategies to encourage learners to develop deep understanding of content areas and their connections, and to build skills to apply knowledge in meaningful ways. Review of the Dispositions assessment data suggests that a majority of our completers of the initial programs created a positive environment of respect and their interactions with students, and the interactions of their students with each other, are polite and respectful, reflecting general warmth and caring, and are appropriate to the cultural and developmental differences among 9

groups of students. They also created a classroom culture characterized by high expectations for most, if not all, students and genuine commitment to the subject by both teacher and students, with students demonstrating pride in their work. The completers of the initial licensure programs also promoted the successful learning of all students, adjusting as needed to instruction plans, and accommodating student questions, needs, and interests. Most completers also communicated frequently with families and successfully engaged them in the instructional program. Information to families about individual students was conveyed in a culturally appropriate manner. Finally, our candidates exhibited a high level of ethics and professionalism in dealings with both students and colleagues and complied fully and voluntarily with school and district regulations. Review of the Teaching Philosophy data suggests that a majority of our completers of the initial programs demonstrate an emerging to comprehensive understanding that all students can learn but may require accommodations to individual differences based on the understanding of how learners grow and develop, recognizing that patterns of learning and development vary individually within and across the cognitive, linguistic, social, emotional, and physical areas and designs and implements. They also appear to have developed an emerging to comprehensive understanding of individual differences and diverse cultures and communities to ensure inclusive learning environments that enable each learner to meet high standards. A majority of our completers also appear to have developed ability to work with others to create environments that support individual and collaborative learning, and that encourage positive social interaction, active engagement in learning, and self-motivation. Finally, they appear to have developed a general and specific theoretical understanding of the need for ongoing professional learning and using evidence to continually evaluate his/her practice, particularly the effects of his/her choices and actions on others (learners, families, other professionals, and the community), and adapts practice to meet the needs of each learner. Finally, Review of these tables suggests that a majority of our completers of the initial programs were observed as being proficient to distinguished across all four broad domains and all 22 components or subdomains of the TESS Observation Scoring Rubric. While there is some variation across some programs, in general, our initial licensure candidates: plans and practice reflect solid knowledge of the content, prerequisite relationships between important concepts, and the instructional practices specific to that discipline. actively seeks knowledge of students' backgrounds, cultures, skills, language proficiency, interests, and special needs, and attains this knowledge for groups of students. Instructional outcomes are stated as goals reflecting high-level learning and curriculum standards. They are suitable for most students in the class, represent different types of learning, and can be assessed. The outcomes reflect opportunities for coordination. Are fully aware of the resources available through the school or district to enhance own knowledge, to use in teaching, or for students who need them. coordinate knowledge of content, of students, and of resources to design a series of learning experiences aligned to instructional outcomes and suitable for groups of students. The lesson or unit has a clear structure and is likely to engage students in significant learning. plans for student assessment are aligned with the instructional outcomes, uses clear criteria, and is appropriate to the needs of students. The candidate intends to use assessment results to plan for future instruction for groups of students. Classroom interactions between the teacher and students and among students are polite and respectful, reflecting general warmth and caring, and are appropriate to the cultural and developmental differences among groups of students. 10

The classroom culture is characterized by high expectations for most students and genuine commitment to the subject by both teacher and students, with students demonstrating pride in their work. Little instructional time is lost because of classroom routines and procedures for transitions, handling of supplies, and performance of non-instructional duties, which occur smoothly. Standards of conduct appear to be clear to students, and the teacher monitors student behavior against those standards. The candidate s response to student misbehavior is appropriate and respects the students' dignity. The classroom is safe, and learning is accessible to all students; the teacher ensures that the physical arrangement is appropriate to the learning activities. The candidate makes effective use of physical resources, including computer technology. Expectations for learning, directions and procedures, and explanations of content are clear to students. Communications are appropriate for students' cultures and levels of development. Most of the candidate's questions elicit a thoughtful response, and the teacher allows sufficient time for students to answer. All students participate in the discussion, with the teacher stepping aside when appropriate. Activities and assignments, materials, and groupings of students are fully appropriate for the instructional outcomes and students' cultures and levels of understanding. All students are engaged in work of a high level of rigor. The lesson's structure is coherent, with appropriate pace. Assessment is regularly used in instruction, through self-assessment by students, monitoring of progress of learning by the candidate and/or students, and high-quality feedback to students. Students are fully aware of the assessment criteria used to evaluate their work. promotes the successful learning of all students, making adjustments as needed to instruction plans and accommodating student questions, needs, and interests. provides an accurate and objective description of the lesson, citing specific evidence. The candidate makes some specific suggestions as to how the lesson might be improved. systems for maintaining both instructional and non-instructional records are accurate, efficient, and effective. communicates frequently with families and successfully engages them in the instructional program. Information to families about individual students is conveyed in a culturally appropriate manner. participates actively in the professional community and in school and district events and projects, and maintains positive and productive relationships with colleagues. seeks out opportunities for professional development based on an individual assessment of need and actively shares expertise with others. The candidate welcomes feedback from supervisors and colleagues. displays a high level of ethics and professionalism in dealings with both students and colleagues and complies fully and voluntarily with school and district regulations. Standard 1.5: Data presented below suggests that we ensure that our candidates model and apply technology standards as they plan, implement, and assess students. Specifically, evidence, disaggregated by specialty area, is obtained from the following assessments and measures: ILab: Lesson & Unit Plans; Teacher Work Samples; Technology Assessment, and TESS field and internship observations S1_1.3_Lesson_Plan S1_1.5 Unit Plan S1_1.7_Technology S1_1.8_Teacher_Work_Sample S1_1.10_TESS_Internship_Observation 11

Analyses of the data/evidence are provided for completers of our initial licensure programs in the 2014-15, 2015-16, and 2016-17 academic years in each of the assessment attachments. Our exiting candidates model and apply technology standards in coursework and clinical experiences. They demonstrate knowledge and skills in accessing databases, digital media, and/or electronic sources as well as the ability to design and facilitate digital learning. They also track and share student performance data digitally. Specifically, review of the Technology assessment data suggests that most of our completers of the initial programs demonstrate an above standard to exemplary knowledge and understanding of the use of technology in their teaching. Review of the lesson plan data suggests that a majority of our completers show mastery in use and selection of appropriate instructional resources and in using evaluation to plan future instruction. Additionally, review of the Unit Plan data suggest that a majority of our initial licensure candidates show mastery in use and selection of a variety of appropriate instructional resources and in using a variety of assessments to evaluation student learning. Review of the Teacher Work Sample data suggests a majority of our completers of the initial programs demonstrate an emerging to comprehensive understanding of the use of multiple methods of assessment to engage learners in their own growth, to monitor learner progress, and to guide the teacher's and learner's decision making. The use of technology in teaching students in field and clinical experiences is also included in the AR-TESS observation assessment (Component 2e: Organizing Physical Space; Component 3d: Using Assessment in Instruction; and Component 4b: Maintaining Accurate Records). Review of this data suggests that our initial candidates make effective use of computer technology in their instruction, management, and assessment of students and in monitoring of progress by both students and teacher, and highquality feedback to students from a variety of sources. Finally, the candidates systems for maintaining both instructional and non-instructional records are accurate, efficient, and effective. Use of Assessment Results to Improve Program PROGRAM YEAR CHANGES MADE DUE TO ASSESSMENT EDUC/SCED MED ENGLISH Fall 2013 (1). Content Knowledge: Because candidates come to the program from accredited baccalaureate degrees in English, as required by the State of Arkansas, and the GPA requirement for entry into the program is 2.75, knowledge level is generally assured. Nevertheless, the English Language Arts advisor notes weaknesses and/or any deficiency beyond those listed on the Pre-Admission analysis and advises candidates to take additional coursework before proceeding with the program. The State Department of Education changed the required tests required English Language Arts in 2011; the results do not coincide with previous scores, and the data for some candidates who took earlier tests is not reflected in the grid. Assessment 2 Thematic Unit Plan has been moved from Assessment 6 to replace the generic Unit Plan completed in the curriculum course. The current Thematic Unit is created during Teaching Adolescent Literature and was specifically designed to align with Standard 3.0, as well as other standards that apply to the organization of knowledge for instruction. The assessment is the major assessment for the course, 12

and candidates share their units with each other via the Blackboard community. The theme must also reflect some element of diversity to strengthen that element and to match the unit s conceptual framework. Because a course in literary theory is seldom offered at the graduate level at UALR, and many English majors have not had a course in it, the program advisor instituted an elective in Literary Analysis in the Secondary English Classroom. This course fills a void in the program and also supplies additional experience with adolescent and multicultural literature. The other graduate elective that is a requirement for nearly all candidates is Teaching Adolescent Literature. With these additions, passing the state required Praxis II is seldom an issue. Another contributing factor is the transcript analysis which is completed for each candidate at entry level whether he or she has a degree in English or not. Any deficits are noted, and candidates rectify that content element from the standards through additional coursework. (2). Professional and Pedagogical Knowledge, Skill, and Dispositions: All candidates undergo rigorous field experiences while being supervised by adjunct faculty who are former English language arts teachers. The program relies heavily on their expertise. The current ELA advisor and teacher of the Specialized Methods course is a former English teacher, grades 7-12. Thus, modeling is an important part of candidate knowledge bases. Instructional skills are developed in two courses on campus, as well as during 60 hours of clinical opportunities in the schools. The Instructional Skills and Classroom Management course provides opportunities for candidates to micro-teach others who are not in their content area as all majors enroll in this introductory course. The Specialized Methods course includes all English language arts majors, plus those candidates in Speech and Drama when the numbers are too low to provide a separate methods course for them.. Thus, candidates experience peer teaching with those who understand their specific content. The ELA program supervisor has also aligned NCTE standards with a Pre- Professional Evaluation Form used by university supervisors during all field experiences. As supervisors continue to supply data, conclusions about candidate expertise in this area can be developed. The Teacher Education Department also conducts, when needed, a Concerns Conference when candidates are exhibiting unprofessional behavior. Domain D on the state-required Pathwise Pre-Professional Form completed during field experiences addresses this area. The Secondary Education Program Coordinator, the program supervisor, the Clinical Placement Director, and the Associate Dean meet with the candidate. The situation is addressed from both sides, and the candidate receives a written copy of the problem, along with the conference outcomes; he/she must sign this form. The three ELA candidates who have been required to attend a conference were asked to voluntarily leave the program. The reasons for this in two instances resulted from unprofessional conduct during the clinical classroom experience. The third failed to enroll in coursework during his Provisional Licensure period; the State Department of Education requires those who are teaching on a provisional license while completing a graduate program to be continuously enrolled during the completion of the degree. Assessment 4 data utilizing the NCTE University Supervisor Observation Form is obtained during the Internship, but previously candidates are evaluated using that 13

FOREIGN LANGUAGE Spring 2014 same form during the clinical experience during Specialized Methods. Candidates can make comparisons in growth in this category.. Praxis II also contains a section on Pedagogy where each candidate is assessed about instructional knowledge. Although this test is not aligned with NCTE standards, baseline data is being collected and can be used if this alignment occurs. (3) Student Learning: The Teacher Work Sample has been part of the program for all candidates, both undergraduate and graduate, who are in the initial licensure program. However, the rubrics were generic, applying across programs. Each candidate conducts this assessment research and analysis project during the Internship. The ELA advisor aligned the rubric with NCTE standards in the spring of 2007. As more candidates complete the program and are evaluated with the revised rubric, conclusions can be drawn about the role of assessment and its effect on students. 1. Candidate Content Knowledge Prior to the collection period for this ACTFL/NCATE report, DISLS faculty had already begun the discussion of raising candidates oral proficiency. We have begun the process of creating a culture for the OPI by requiring a MOPI of all students enrolled in the skills development classes. Since only a few candidates have sat for the official OPI and few students who have been a part of the MOPI process have reached the teacher education candidate stage, the faculty is not yet sure of the impact of this process. Scores on the official ACTFL OPI will continue to drive curricular reform as we tweak the curriculum to better prepare candidates to pass the OPI at the Advanced-Low level. It is an expectation within DISLS that all courses at the 3000-level and above are taught in the target language. No courses are offered in translation. Study abroad is not required of all students, but all teacher education candidates are encouraged to spend time abroad in one of our university locations. The courses taken by foreign language candidates represent a logical distribution of skill-building courses, culture, linguistics, and literature. The addition of work on the 3Ps paradigm in the culture courses and the requirement of three 3000-level courses on the interpretive, interpersonal, and presentational modes of language not only provides candidates with current content knowledge, but also lets them experience these language models in their own foreign language education. 2. Candidate Professional and Pedagogical Knowledge, Skill, and Dispositions We are fortunate here at UALR to have four foreign language pedagogy courses to help develop the pedagogical knowledge, skills, and dispositions of our candidates. These four courses have been in place for over 10 years. Faculty that are current in the field and are productive scholars and recognized nationally teach all four courses. Foreign language education faculty supervise all pre-professional and internship experiences. Faculty also have input in placement of candidates for these experiences. The faculty believe that the pedagogical background of our candidates is exceptional. 3. Candidate Impact on Student Learning We believe that our Teacher Work Sample presented as evidence here is helping the faculty get a handle on our candidates impact on student learning. With a separate 14

MATH Fall 2015 second language assessment course, our candidates have many experiences creating assessments and appropriate rubrics. Likewise, assessment theories and selection of assessment tools form part of the course content. As more candidates complete student teaching and undertake completion of the Teacher Work Sample, we will have concrete evidence of candidates ability to measure what their students know and are able to do and to report the results to appropriate stakeholders. more clearly align indicators with the assessment task, rubric, and data analysis. CONTENT KNOWLEDGE: Candidates completing the graduate secondary mathematics initial licensure program enter the program with a strong content foundation. The program utilizes the mathematics content to build equally strong pedagogical knowledge, skills, and dispositions which provide the Central Arkansas area with mathematics teachers of excellence. As indicated in Assessment 1 the performance of UALR Graduate Mathematics Candidates on the Praxis II Exam have a strong passing rate. The requirement that candidates pass Praxis II before entering their Internship will ensure that all candidates possess an appropriate content knowledge base prior to their field experience. Assessment 2 clearly demonstrates candidates are required to meet strong admission standards through their mathematics content as related to the NCTM Standards and GPA. The program of study will include the History of Mathematics and Methods in Mathematical Technologies. Additionally this program of study has changed to meet the NCTM standards by substituting specific courses that will cover discrete math, proof, and history. The strong admission standards ensure candidates have a basic mathematical foundation to build their pedagogical skills on. Assessment 6 was revised to further develop the candidate s mathematical content in the NCTM standards. PROFESSIONAL AND PEDAGOGICAL KNOWLEDGE, SKILL, AND DISPOSITIONS: In Assessment 3 candidates are required to demonstrate their professional and pedagogical knowledge, skill and dispositions through a unit development that is scored by a rubric based on Arkansas Teacher Licensure Standards and NCTM Frameworks. All candidates met expectations as specified by the rubrics demonstrating an application of pedagogical skills to the mathematics content. In Assessment 4 candidates demonstrate their pedagogical knowledge through two 30 hour pre-professional field experiences and one 12 week Internship. In the past candidates were assessed through a Pathwise Plus form which meets Arkansas State Teacher Licensure Standards now the state is transitioning to TESS. The program has revised NCTM Mathematics Observation Guide based on applicable NCTM standards. All candidates met expectations for successful content instructional planning and delivery, classroom management and professionalism. All of our university supervisors are retired certified mathematics teachers with records of excellence in teaching mathematics and have been trained in Pathwise Plus and will be trained on TESS providing content knowledge for the mathematics NCTM assessment and pedagogy for the knowledge, skills and dispositions needed to be a teacher of quality. STUDENT LEARNING 15

SCIENCE Fall 2013 In Assessment 5 the data for the NCTM Effect on Student Learning indicate that candidates have a positive effect on 7th-12th grade students in relation to NCTM standards. The data demonstrate the mathematics candidates are encouraging all students including diverse populations, those with special needs, and English as second language learners to learn with mean ratings that meet or exceed expectations. (1) Content knowledge: Our program allows candidates to acquire a master s degree along with initial licensure. Because of this we require strong content as a foundation for admission to the program. Previous to 2007 candidates were allowed admission with 18 hours of prerequisite courses to complete. Starting in the fall of 2007 candidates are required to lack no more than 12 hours of prerequisite courses. Strengthening a candidate s knowledge base insures the candidate will pass all Praxis II Life/Earth/Physical Content. We made this decision upon analysis of Praxis II data when it was noted several candidates were able to pass the Praxis life or physical science content first time, yet others took two or three times to pass the Praxis II Earth Science Content. Candidates lack of earth science hours was evident in their failure to pass Earth Science Praxis. The Department of Education has now changed the requirements for licensure to just including Life Science and Physical Science. Earth Science is no longer required for licensure. Earth Science is no longer required for licensure. This change occurred in January, 2013. This will change our emphasis in the program of study in the future. The Earth Science majors will have the opportunity to choose whether they want to be licensed in Life or Physical Science. (2) Professional and pedagogical knowledge, skill, and dispositions: We have had 100% pass rate on the first time candidates taking the Life or Physical Pedagogy. Arkansas no longer has the Praxis III administration, but our graduates have always scored at the proficient or above level. Our general instructional methods and classroom management, specialized science methods course and curriculum design all require a field co-requisite that allows candidates to put into practice the theory learned in the courses. The courses were evaluated through Pathwise which is similar to and a foundation for the Praxis III. Candidates were required to demonstrate content, planning, instruction, human relations, professionalism, research & technology, professional ethics and diversity as align with Arkansas Teacher Licensure Standards and the NSTA applicable standards in their exit portfolio. However, Praxis III evaluations are no longer used in Arkansas. In the future a program called Teacher Evaluation Support System (TESS) will used to evaluate our candidates. This data will not be shared with the universities, so evaluation performance the first year in the classroom will not be possible unless a data sharing system is developed at the Department of Education. (3) Student learning: Candidates are required to submit a student work sample during their internship that contains a pre and post test of content taught, an analysis of the test as demonstrated in a graph, a reflection as to the effectiveness of a lesson and a plan to improve how the lesson was taught such as adding or deleting specific instructions or content. Beginning spring 2008 and continuing through Spring, 2011, data was collected on Praxis III for our graduates. We collected and analyzed data on our candidates. No student scored below the required score for licensure. Praxis III utilized trained assessors who have passed the ETS test battery, experienced teachers, administrators, and teacher educators who complete a one-time evaluation which includes pre-interview, classroom observation, and post-interview to determine whether the novice teacher should continue in the classroom without remediation. It is now the goal of the Department of Education 16

Social Studies Spring 2015 and the schools in Arkansas to train all teachers in TESS. Extensive professional development has been conducted to train administrators, faculty, and university faculty in the TESS system. Teachers will be evaluated using this system in all schools in the state beginning in the Fall, 2013. The Dean s of the state universities are working with the Department of Education to be able to code the graduates of each university so data can be acquired from graduated for evaluation purposes. The system has not been approved as of September 1, 2013, but more work will be done in the future to code graduates and match them to each university. Assessments listed in Section II have not been changed for the three years of reported data. The University is in the process of making the transition to the 2012 NSTA Standards and will rewrite assessments and rubrics to meet the new standards. The current assessment were still able to assess the learning of the candidates in the Secondary Graduate Science Program. 1. Evidence must be presented in this section that assessment results have been analyzed and have been or will be used to improve candidate performance and strengthen the program. This description should not link improvements to individual assessments but, rather, it should summarize principal findings from the evidence, the faculty's interpretation of those findings, and changes made in (or planned for) the program as a result. Describe the steps program faculty has taken to use information from assessments for improvement of both candidate performance and the program, This information should be organized around (1) content knowledge, (2) professional and pedagogical knowledge, skill, and dispositions, and (3) student learning. In addition, for each assessment listed in Section II, describe why or why not the assessment has been changed since the program was submitted previously. (Response limited to 24,000 characters) Table: Transcript Analysis: Content at Admission, Remediation, and at Graduation (attached) has been added to provide deeper meaning to Assessment 2 as part of the Transcript Analysis. This is a visual of evidence identifying candidate deficiencies entering the program as determined by the Transcript Analysis. This table shows the content hours completed by each candidate as they enter the program, the number of hours deficient by content area, and the total number of content hours completed per area upon Graduation. This table reflects candidates for 2010-2011 and 2010-2012 (two administrations). This table will be included in future NCSS reports. Following feedback from the 2014 report, the Prerequisite Evaluation Form (Appendix D page 46) has been revised to the Transcript Analysis Form (Appendix D page 47) and the following course align is now being administered to be more in alignment with NCSS expectations for all candidates. The Transcript Analysis Form will require 12 hours of US History, 9 hours of World History, 6 hours of Political Science, 6 hours of Geography, 6 hours of Economics, 3 hours of either Anthropology or Cultural/Human Geography (in addition to the 6 hours of geography), and 3 hours of either Sociology or Psychology. Following feedback from the 2014 report, the program has added content course requirement to the Transcript Analysis to strengthen NCSS Standard 1.8. All candidates will be required to complete 3 hours in one of two classes: HIST 4301 History of Technology - A survey of the role of technology from the Stone Age to the nuclear age. 17